Latest New Books In Theater podcast - George Hunka

Check out the latest New Books In Theater podcast with George Hunka about his new book "Word Made Flesh."

Busy Bee

Hey folks. A few things.

1. I'm starting a new day job on Tuesday which means I'm enjoying some rest and relaxation this week. Lots of playing Portal 2 (which is so awesome!) and buying clothes and catching up on Doctor Who. Less blogging, therefore.

2. Blue Coyote Theater Group's next production opens May 27th. It's the third Standards of Decency Project, this one subtitled "300 Vaginas Before Breakfast." The theme is the ubiquity of pornography in the age of the internet. Playwrights include myself, David Johnston, Mac Rogers, Adam Szymkowicz, Cheri Magid, Jacqueline Christy, David Foley and Jordan Seavey. I fine looking bunch indeed. My contribution to this evening is a play called "The Metaphor." More details to come. Totally looking forward to it!

3. The next New Books In Theater podcast will arrive tonight or tomorrow. Have you followed it, liked it on Facebook, subscribed on iTunes, or whatever? Heard the last one with Martin Denton? If not, check it out here. If so, next one's coming soon!

4. Why is it that in an era of 24 hour news and blogs and constant information, Americans seem increasingly unclear on facts? Isn't that...really a bad thing? Just saying.

5. Just in case I wasn't entirely clear on this point, I made these all up. To be funny.

eBook Publishing in Stage-Directions

There's an excellent article in Stage Directions about traditional play publishers and eReaders here.

Of course, it makes me think of this and this.

New New Books in Theater podcast

The 2nd New Books in Theater podcast interview is live. I speak with Martin Denton about the Plays and Playwrights series. Listen here.

Little-Known Quotes from Well-Known Playwrights

When I was younger, I used to sit for hours with books of familiar quotations. It was always fun to find inspiring or unexpected quotes from my favorite authors, or to discover a gem of a quote for the first time. Lately, though, with the internet, I find my searches to be increasingly narrow, less whimsical.

So... for you, dear readers, and for myself...I went digging through old forgotten books and the dustiest parts of the internet (the ones from the early 90s with those weird protocols) to find you some choice, extremely rare, little known quotes from famous and/or influential dramatists. Just to recapture that spirit of discovery.

You're welcome.

-------

“Paper is like Joyce Carol Oates: white.”

-Caryl Churchill

“Rise early. Write. Disappoint your sons. Read the newspaper. Go to bed early. Success.”

-Arthur Miller

“Deep knowledge is not knowledge of the thing itself, but knowledge of a thing like the thing. Then, you gain not one knowledge, but two knowledges. Of the thing. And of the original thing with is like the thing. Which is the barbarism of the privileged class.”

-George Bernard Shaw

“If I’d seen a playwright ever write an’ play at the same time, I’d have given ‘em more of a chance at cards. Can I get an ‘amen?’”

-Mark Twain

“Caryl Churchill is a writer of some note, but in the sack, she makes me explain everything.”

-Sam Shepard

“The Greeks could be a crushing bore. I recommend dressing everyone in combat fatigues or S&M gear.”

-Sophocles

“To write a play one must be born a playwright. Otherwise, you’re starting at a huge disadvantage.”

-Edward Albee

“Palestine. Fuck. Egypt…fuck. ”

-David Mamet

“All hail the writer who has not sharpened her pen.”

-Sarah Ruhl

“Quality is like quantity, but there’s a lot less of it.”

-Suzan-Lori Parks

“Only assholes write plays about Nazis.”

-David Lindsay-Abaire

“If you show a gun in the first act, some mother fucker is getting totally shot to shit and I’m all out of bubble gum.”

-Adam Bock

“A play is never finished. You’ll find out how much I mean that when you read my Last Will and Testament.”

-Tony Kushner

“Stop playing the drums in the upstairs lobby, or the third act will come off sexist.”

-Henrik Ibsen

“To write drama is to leave a can of Coke by the side of the road. Then, sit on that can of Coke. Where’s the can of Coke now?”

-Stephen Adly Guirgis

“Comedy is easy. First, people have to fall down. Next, include someone a little hefty. It’s a hoot.”

-Sarah Kane

“Standing on a ledge again. Everyone laughs at dancing monkey with the typewriter. Not for long, though.”

-Neil Simon

When Can We Review The New Spider Man?

So how long will everyone have to wait to see the completed version of Spider Man 2.0? I don't mean whatever it is that will be put on stage after the original direction is discarded. I mean, the version of Spider Man that is considered complete enough to be called a completed version of the new version? Of course, they claim it's one month of previews, but we shouldn't rush it.

I mean, heck, the original version of Turn Off The Dark is still in previews. It will cease to exist in previews.

Let's keep in mind that this is just like painting. One would never judge a painting before the painter felt the painting was ready. If the painting that you are intending to review was previously painted by a different painter, you should still give the new painter the same amount of time that you gave the painter of the original painting. Even if you already paid to see the incomplete painting of a different painter with the same title hung in the same gallery, using largely the same imagery, you shouldn't think twice about paying for another ticket to see the new painting based on the old one, painted by a different painter, using largely the same imagery, with the same title.

Friday Shameless Self Promotion

Just because it's my blog and hey, why not? You've seen more commercials for Lipitor. I don't feel bad.

THE AMERICANS is available on Kindle and Nook. Only $1.99. (It's like, silly not to get one if you have an eReader. It costs you less than a beer, and it supports me personally, and you get a great play out of the deal.)

WHEN IS A CLOCK is available from Samuel French. Get it from them directly, or on Amazon, or Barnes and Noble, or whatever other fine online retailer, you like.

On Playscripts (now with new logo!) you can find GLEE CLUB, RABBI HERSH AND THE TALKING LOBSTER and THE DEATH OF KING ARTHUR.

Thanks to the Guardian

Thanks to Chris Wilkinson at the Guardian for this post, highlighting the New Books in Theater podcast. Just to clarify: I'll be podcasting AND blogging, not just moving into the other medium.

Charles Isherwood now has a segment on WQXR + ticket promotion

I just received a release about this and I thought I'd share it. Sounds cool. It's a segment called AROUND BROADWAY which I guess will be a regular Wednesday feature. You can hear the first one by clicking here. It's a segment about BENGAL TIGER AT THE BAGHDAD ZOO.

Apparently...if you correctly answer the trivia question featured on the page by midnight tonight, you’ll have a chance at winning two tickets to see the play!

So give it a go!

Dear Parabasis

Buck up, depressed (and depressing) campers.

Oldie but a goodie

Just remembering this little video, from the original production of Glee Club.

Which is, did you know, now available for purchase?

Shameless.

The Americans now available on the Nook as well

The Americans is now also available as a NookBook. Find it here.

Read the original post regarding self-publishing here.

Have a new book?

If you have recently published a book about theater, or you're a publisher of books about theater, and you'd like an author to be interviewed for the New Books In Theatre podcast, please let me know. mattfr - at - gmail.com

Jeff Lewonczyk and Hope Cartelli

Congratulations!

Introducing the New Books In Theater podcast

I'm happy to introduce the New Books In Theater podcast. New Books In Theater is a part of the New Books Network. "Like" the podcast on Facebook and add us to your RSS feed. The podcast will shortly be available on iTunes as well.

My first interview as the host is now live: a terrific conversation with Pamela Cobrin from Barnard, about her book "From Winning The Vote To Directing On Broadway: The Emergence of Women on the New York State from 1880-1927". As the subject of the representation of women on Broadway has been a topic of interest for theatermakers over the past few years, I expect the subject will be of interest to all.

If you're an author or publisher and you would like a book considered for the podcast, feel free to contact me. I'm looking at books soon to be released and maybe a 4-5 year window of publication date prior to 2011.

Announcing "The Americans" available in Kindle Format

I'm stepping into the brave new world of self-publishing by making THE AMERICANS available on Amazon.com as an eBook for $1.99.

THE AMERICANS was first produced in 2004. It's the closest thing I ever wrote to a play about 9/11, and it was produced the same month as the Kerry v. Bush election. It's a play that's always been near and dear to me.

For me, the decision to publish it on my own wasn't exactly automatic. In fact, I went back and forth on whether or not it was a good idea. To break it down, briefly:

GOOD IDEA

Quality. The electronic edition of the book, as self-published, is, in formatting, largely indistinguishable from an eBook from a major publisher. Downloading the play will not feel, on your device, as if you've gotten a lower quality item than one that would be available from a mainstream publisher.

Availability. It makes my book available for purchase immediately for everyone (as long as they have a Kindle) on one of the largest retail outlets in the world. When self-publishing required physical copies that you had to try to sell on your own, this was a much tougher model. Now, the item is available for everyone with Internet access and interest. (Oh, and a Kindle.)

Cost. The price is right for self-publishing on the Kindle: free. It cost me, essentially, nothing but time to publish the book this way.

Exposure. Simply put, my goal is to get my work in people's hands. Right now, this play is living on my laptop and in my memory. It hasn't found a traditional publisher. This way, the play gets more possible readers than it would otherwise. I believe strongly that it's a play people will love. Shouldn't I take advantage of every method available, new and old, to bring it to people?

Royalties. Each copy of this book I sell gets me as much in royalties as a copy of GLEE CLUB. In some cases, more.

BAD IDEA

Reputation. I honestly have been concerned that by publishing a book in this format without the traditional blessing of a publisher, would damage how other writers and how publishers saw me. I am published, and proudly, by Samuel French and Playscripts. Still, even with those very mainstream blessings, I was concerned that self-publishing was viewed as a bit of a low-rent move. I don't want publishers to see me as competing with them, or to be viewed by other playwrights as just dumping lesser works into the market because I couldn't get the published elsewhere. Perhaps this is a concern that's unfounded, but I'm sure I'm not alone in an aversion to being perceived this way. Traditional routes to publishing and production are viewed as more legitimate than these alternatives right now.

Marketing. To get the word out about a self-published title, I have only my own time and resources and efforts. DPS, Playscripts, Samuel French - they all have catalogues, markets, strategies. They work to get your work produced and sold because it's in their own interests financially. Self-publishing, even in this format, means that you're an army of one.

Legal. My book offers general legal language about production rights and my ownership of them. Still, if someone downloaded this book and decided to perform the play without obtaining the necessary permissions, it would be up to me to chase them down, try to obtain royalties, arrange an agreement. Play publishers are extremely careful on that front. For example: my mother enthusiastically purchased several copies of GLEE CLUB from Playscripts. Apparently, she had to show them that she was not, in fact, a school getting copies with the intention of performing the play without obtaining the rights. In short: they ask, they care, and that's for my benefit as much as their own.

Gray Area

Price Point. The Americans is priced at $1.99 for several good reasons. One is that I believe that people are more likely to click and buy without haggling with themselves at that price. You could, out of curiosity, download the play without feeling like you just gave up a movie ticket. Also, it's an eBook, not a physical edition. My costs are low, you don't get an actual "thing" that cost money to produce. It makes sense to charge less in that regard. Then again, are you less likely to buy one of my other plays at a higher price, considering you can get this one at $1.99? Do I begin to drive the value of my own work (and the work of others?) down by offering this play at such a low price? Am I competing with myself? Are people less likely to buy WHEN IS A CLOCK for $9.95 if they can get THE AMERICANS for $1.99? Or will easy access to this play increase the visibility and interest in my other work?

The Limits of the Format. As of now, the book is available only for the Kindle. That means if you want a physical copy of THE AMERICANS... well, you're basically out of luck. That limits the reach inherently. I may try to expand into other devices, but it's very hard to tell if it's worth the effort. Making things available through Apple is, as far as I can tell, a complex process. Making THE AMERICANS available on the Nook or other eReaders might be worthwhile, and I'm open to suggestions. For now, Amazon's device and store seem the most popular.

Photo: Vince Gatton in THE AMERICANS

No matter what, it'll be an intriguing experiment. It's my hope that as I try this out, I can check in with all of you about how it's going, what I'm learning. Maybe more playwrights out there will try this. Who knows?

I am, regardless, very interested in what you think and in your feedback. What do you think of the pros and cons that I've written above? If you do buy the book, how does it look? How's the formatting? Is it a fun experience to buy it, or a bit of a drag? Are you a book lover who's sort of against eBooks on principle, or an enthusiast for this type of thing? I'm sure there are plenty of ways to view this project, and I'd love to discuss it.

Regardless, if you do have a Kindle and you're a supporter of my work, go ahead and purchase THE AMERICANS today. It couldn't be easier or cheaper, and it's a great play.

Repost: Defending The Invalid

Recommended reading: this post on American Theatre Wing's blog.

Book of Mormon Review from J. Scott Reynolds

J. Scott Reynolds is the artistic director of Handcart Ensemble. He's a friend of mine, a great guy, and I worked with his company to create Genesis a few years ago. He's also a member of the Mormon church. On nytheatre.com, he gave his perspective on The Book of Mormon. I highly recommend it.

A great solution

I think I have a good solution to the question of how to ensure that we distribute playwriting dollars to those who need them. Basically, there’s an epidemic of good playwrights who use New York success to move them into the LA screenwriting scene. I think this creates a sort of feedback loop, wherein New York success leads to LA dollars that leads back to New York success (the triumphant return of the screenwriter to the grateful city.) We need to move these dollars out of the cycle, and get cash to Montana, to Nebraska, to Wyoming, to Arkansas, to Vermont, to Mississippi. Therefore, maybe all professional royalties in Los Angeles for original or licensed scripts should pay fees into a trust. Not the NEA, but a trust or foundation organized for those purpose. Then, someone, perhaps a Chairperson, at the trust could take in those fees and determine where underserved communities are in the most need. That way, wealthy playwrights would be funneling their own success back into the market.

What do you think?

Christopher Shinn

Great post at the Guardian about the differences between US and British audiences from his perspective.

Word Made Flesh

Just saw this. George Hunka's Word Made Flesh: Philosophy, Eros and Contemporary Tragic Drama is now available for purchase.

George Hunka is the original gangsta of theatre bloggers.

Scott Walters on public funding

First, Scott Walters was on Studio 360, which is really cool.

Second, in a recent blog post on Theatre Ideas, Scott Walters says:

Recommendation: The NEA ought to confine itself to providing seed money for theatres in underserved communities.

If you've followed Scott as long as I have (years!) this sounds like a reframing/continuation of his belief that too much focus is placed on urban environments and that public and private dollars tend to be in theater hubs like New York, Chicago, and Los Angeles. I'd also add Minneapolis (well funded indeed and well-loved too) to the list of big theater towns. So, under this recommendation, it's clear that the NEA dollars would effectively disappear from New York and Chicago and LA and other "well-served" communities. Scott says it himself at the end of his post: "Serve everybody, not just middle-class urbanites."

For me, I agree that the NEA should do more outreach to smaller communities and theaters. I don't see why we need to rob Peter to pay Paul though: why should large theatrical institutions surrender their public funding to pay for smaller ones? Shouldn't the goal be to increase funding across the board and add initiatives?

In my day job (which is for a religious institution) we talk a lot about scarcity models versus abundance models. When we talk about taking money from one thing (urban, cultural institutions) to give that money to rural communities, we're acting as if there is one small pot of money, scare resources, and we have to refocus those dollars one way or another.

But, instead, we see that when Americans prioritize something (say...war) money strangely materializes in sums that dwarf the entire budget of the NEA tenfold. There is money out there, and we should expect it and ask for it. I believe that both the urban theater communities and small rural communities should expect funding. The problem isn't that one group is hogging all the money.

The problem is that the funding is too low, not that funding is misdirected. We need funding to branch out in lots of directions. Arts funding shouldn't look like a fire hose, it should look running water in many, many different faucets.

Conservatives criticizing NPR...

...is like an anorexic trying to get a healthy person to stop eating so much.

Blue Coyote Thaeter Group begins new grant program for playwrights

Blue Coyote Theater Group has been my home since 2004. I love that they're doing this, and I think the writers they've chosen are all top-notch. Exciting news!

Read all about it:

Blue Coyote Theater Group announces new grant program for playwrights

Groundbreaking New York City Theater Company Celebrates Its Tenth Anniversary with a Deepened Commitment to the Future of American Theater

New York, New York March 25, 2011 – Blue Coyote Theater Group, celebrating ten years as a leading producer of downtown New York theater, announced today its commitment to new plays and emerging playwrights with the Coyote Commission Project, a multi-year grant program that promises to nurture the development of groundbreaking new works for future production.

The inaugural recipients of the Coyote Commission Project are: Robert Attenweiler (All Kinds of Shifty Villains at the Krain); Boo Killebrew (The Play About My Dad at 59E59 Theaters); Kristen Palmer (Departures at Blue Coyote); Christine Whitley (The Goatwoman of Corvis County at Shakespeare & Co); John Yearley (Another Girl at Naked Angels reading series); and David Zellnik (book writer and lyricist for Yank! at the York Theatre).

In a joint statement, Blue Coyote founding members Kyle Ancowitz, Robert Buckwalter, Gary Shrader and Stephen Speights said, “Theater artists are still reeling from the continuing effects of the economic crisis. As a leading producer of new playwrights downtown, we must make decisive efforts to protect unique dramatic voices from consolidations and cutbacks in arts funding, and ensure the arrival of tomorrow’s classics. We are thrilled to be investing in the craftsmen who exhibit great promise in contributing positively to the American arts landscape.”

Grant recipients were selected with consideration of the following criteria: their excellence in choice of subject matter; their finesse in actualizing their ideas; their willingness to follow their impulse to challenge and provoke the status quo; their respective singular voices; and their ability to express themselves with both humor and insight.

In addition to a monetary award, commissioned playwrights create one play for a possible world premiere production with Blue Coyote Theater Group. Blue Coyote supports the playwright through a developmental process that includes public readings and ongoing dramaturgical support.

The New York Times has praised Blue Coyote Theater Group for producing “sprawling, entertaining drama[s] with…large cast[s] in a time when most downtown plays are intimate, pinched affairs.”

And Martin Denton, of nytheatre.com

, writes, “Blue Coyote Theater Group is one of a very small number of companies that has earned my complete trust in guiding me to stimulating, challenging, and exciting new plays and playwrights. They are true champions of important new dramatic writing, providing platforms for excellent writers who not only have unique and commanding voices, but also have something worthwhile to say. I am very eager to experience the results of their latest endeavor, commissioning new work for the theatre.”

The Coyote Commission Project is part of a series of Blue Coyote efforts initiated with the goal of illuminating the work of new playwrights in New York City. In conjunction with this project, Blue Coyote and Access Theater will host public readings of works in progress from additional playwrights at the Access Theater from March 30 through April 3rd. Blue Coyote plans to document the creative process on its Facebook page and newly designed interactive website, now under construction, at www.bluecoyote.org

.

Too Soon?

Let The Book of Mormon Backlash commence!

Response to Should We Stop Making Art

Isaac Butler at Parabasis poses the supply and demand question, by way of the Collective Artists Think Tank.


Isaac's thoughts:

"For me, well, first let me say that it's definitely not a great recommendation for every market. New York is over-saturated in a way that few other places are. But still, there's something to this. I take this to be more of an invitation to figure out a business model that works for raising money for your shows (and scaling your work appropriately) rather than anything else. Of course at the same time if we waited around until we had created the ideal circumstances to do our shows we'd... never do our shows."

My thoughts:

He frames it as "Should We Stop Making Art?" which I think isn't exactly the question posed. CATT seems to be saying to production companies: "Don't just do a lot of work if you can't afford it."

All of this is of a piece from the statement on the CATT that "Art is a profession; and artists who do not get paid are not professionals. Period." The CATT is trying to say, as far as I can tell, "The reason artists don't make any money is because they do not expect to, and if you undervalue yourself, and you run your business in an unsustainable way, it will not pay you and it will not sustain you."

It's not an attempt to call artists who have yet to be paid un-professional. They seem to be saying that if you want to be a professional, it behooves you to get yourself paid. It does not, it appears to me, seem to be a way to purposefully attack people who do unpaid work. It seems that what they're saying is: "You deserve to be paid." Not "If you can't get paid, you're just a hobbyist." I can see what the goal is here, and I understand it, even if I think it's sort of needlessly insulting (even if it's not intentionally so) to people who are struggling to find work in a difficult environment.

All that being said, I still find this all rather hopeless and it's my instinct to try to keep it in the background. Meaning: I don't think that market-based thinking is invalid; but I do think that if we suggest that it should drive how we produce creative work, we're losing our way.

Our goal should be to invite and encourage and foster as much creativity as possible, to celebrate and embrace it, and to try to find a way to (as I've said before) to reduce the market influences on artists. We shouldn't force our community to comply with principles of economics that, inherently, raise efficiency above beauty on the list of things to focus on.

Instead of labeling artists by their pay grade and trying to find ways to curtail the exposure of new playwrights (because if there's one thing I know about new plays is that they're overexposed), we should commit our energies to bringing new audiences to our invigorated and active stages. Maybe a population that loves theater would be less likely to defund the NEA; more likely to see the value in the arts. (Let's face it: it's rare to hear theaters trumpeting the amazing amount of new work and the multitude of voices out there. We're not exactly great evangelists for our own work. We sound, more often than not, like apologists.)

I fear we've begun to concede that the market is the arbiter of taste and that the market is the best gauge of success and failure. If you decided in your life to go work on the stage, some part of you has already rejected that idea. If the market had its way, anything that couldn't be streamed via satellite into people's homes would be thrown into a scrap heap; all chickens would be grown in test tubes; all prisons would be privatized. It's up to us to push back against the market; not to become more like it.

Helen Shaw writes about Mat Smart in Upstaged

Helen Shaw, theater critic and writer at Time Out New York, weighs in on the Mat Smart cross-posting flurry. (She uses the word "kerfuffle" - which should be put alongside the word "kabuki" as things we now say all the time that we didn't used to say all the time.)

From her post:

"But faster than you can say, "Mat, I think you might be blaming the victim a smidge," playwrights started to leap for Smart's throat. Some of it was quasihysterical, dismissive and emblematic of the kind of vanity Smart was attacking. Josh Conkel jumped to the conclusion that Smart is saying, "Minorities are poor because of LAZINESS," and he does this in a post titled "The Wisdom of Straight White Dudes." I have loved Conkel's work (like MilkMilkLemonade), but his posts on the Youngblood blog tend to elide real inequalities with the difficulties of getting a play produced. There's a mare's nest of interrelated injustice in theatrical production, but fairness is a slippery—sometimes aesthetically dangerous—concept in the arts."

I think Shaw's post is typical of her: clear-eyed, smart, formidable. I do think, though, that she sort of gives Smart a pass ("a smidge") for being provocative, but doesn't give those who he has actively provoked the same benefit of the doubt. They're no less outraged than Smart is, and, I would argue, for far more complex reasons.

I'm also skeptical of the idea that highlighting inequalities is the same thing as demanding fairness. I've never heard anyone seriously make a good case that people should ignore aesthetics in favor of some imaginary system of doling out productions by group or by quota. Does the fact that production opportunities will never be "fair" (whatever that means) mean that artists like Conkel should stifle their full-throated truth-telling about the importance of access? (I got all sorts of complicated feedback when I told a little truth about the wall between the un-Agented and the larger institutions, despite their public policies.) Is the answer, really, that everyone should shut up, get in line, and write better plays?

I think that saying "hey, it's more complicated than that" is not an argument that aesthetics don't matter. Acknowledging class is not an argument that fairness should trump talent. In fact, the people who care most about the quality of the work they see are often the same people who are decrying the challenges of the theatrical caste system. Conkel, himself, has loads of talent and works his ass off. If Smart is right...why does Conkel care so much?

It seems that all everyone wants is the best and hardest working artists to get opportunities. The question is: do we get to that goal by treating class and access as if they are just background noise, another part of the laundry list? Or by engaging with those issues with passion and intelligence?

Mat Smart versus your excuses

If you're looking to read something that is delicious blog-fodder...you could try reading Mat Smart's post: The Real Reasons Playwrights Fail.

To quote:

"However, this is what I believe, with all due respect to my peers:

our general laziness,
inability to commit,
defeatist attitude,
lack of talent,
and unwillingness to truly listen and change—
are the real reasons we—the “emerging” playwright—fail."

I love the "with all due respect" line. That makes it more respectful.

I actually find the post, to say the least, ham-fisted and frustrating.

Smart takes the stance that writers who complain about the obstacles they face should hold up a mirror to their own failings. Fair enough, I guess. I'd agree that talent and elbow grease are key components to a successful career, as well as a certain mental toughness. I'd also agree that in the social world of playwrights (such as it is) talent can often be the elephant in the room. It's a messy and subjective and weird and lends itself to tactlessness. People don't like to talk about it.

The essay, though, ignores the very real class issues involved in, oh, every aspect of American life. Smart also overplays the provocateur. Referring to his list as the "real reasons" implies that other, systemic complains are imaginary, excuses. He is saying that writers who do not submit to criticism easily, who protect their work too closely, who don't "fix" their plays, or whatever else...are artistically failing and it translates into failure professionally. It is, in short, a reassertion of the idea of a meritocracy.

Frankly, I don't see why there cannot be both lazy writers (I'm sure there are, but most of the one's I've met work pretty hard) and systemic roadblocks. I don't see why these notions need to compete with each other. One is no less real than the other. The work habits of individual writers seems to be an entirely different issue than whether or not racism or commercialism can frustrate people.

I imagine, reading this essay, that Smart has had long nights of merciless editing and on those nights, he feels a lack of sympathy for those recite a litany of external torments for their lack of success. He seems more intent on blowing off steam than constructing a careful argument. (What, for example, does the label "emerging" have to do with a willingness to be a ruthless editor of one's own work? Is he really intending to say that people who complain about racism should just work harder? Really?) I wonder if the real issue here is just tone. If he'd said "sure there are systemic problems, but you can also get in your own way if you don't look in the mirror," I think I'd object less. Regardless, give it a read. Love to hear what you think.

link: Don't Blame (Only) The Artists

From the terrific "You've Cott Mail" list, a great blog post from Linda Essig at Creative Infrastructure. Read it all here.

From the post:

"What I agree with

1. There is too little attention paid to actual costs at every level of the “food chain.” Funders, presenters, generative artists, collaborators and audience members need to acknowledge the real cost of making art.
2. The people in the production stream “at the bottom of the food chain,” in this case the artists, have a lot of latent power. [but see below: control of production is only one source of power]
3. Artists – and their collaborators — should be paid a living wage by arts organizations.
4. Artists should view themselves as entrepreneurs, and develop a business plan accordingly. A plan that considers all revenue sources, all budget expenditures, and realistically addresses the potentialities for the future is a necessity, even for artists who are full time employees of arts organizations. By thinking of it s a business plan rather than a personal budget, the artist professionalizes their activities. Which brings me to what I question…

What I question

1. “artists who do not get paid are not professionals. Period.” CATT’s criterion seems arbitrary. Why measure one’s status as a professional by money, especially when money is so hard to come by. Let’s say, for example, that you are a painter. Eight hours a day are spent in the studio painting, eights hours a week spent on visiting galleries. Your professional business plan calls for diversified income streams that include a freelance graphic design business and the ubiquitous food service industry job on weekends. Your income stream is not generated from painting, but you enter the studio every single day and create art. You consider yourself a professional artist. Why should CATT say you aren’t? Was Van Gogh a professional artist? Even though he didn’t sell a painting in his lifetime? [I do agree, however, that there are instances in which incorrect notions of professionalism have been used as a veil for the exploitation of artists]
2. Although artists have latent power in the production stream, control of the means of production is one of only several bases of power over supply. Others include control of information and control of resources. The artist controls neither of these.

Two other thoughts

1. We can’t really talk about the oversupply of artists, arts organizations, or artistic product without talking about the oversupply of training programs. Why are there so many MFA programs training theatre artists, dancers, and even arts administrators, if there is not viable employment for them? What are we [i.e. the academic arts community] teaching our students to do when they get out of graduate school?
2. A performing arts ecosystem is a local ecosystem. It involves artists creating in a specific location for live audience in a specific location, often with locally or regionally generated funding. The CATT members write from a specific New York-centric perspective. (Since I once had that perspective myself, I readily recognize its presence.) There are people making interesting work in urban — and rural — enclaves throughout the country, but in each region or city, the arts “food chain” is unique. Artists who choose to live in a city like Phoenix, for example, must create a portfolio career to sustain their work, even when they are fortunate and talented enough to have part of their income derived from that work (CATT’s definition of a professional artist)."

Ken Davenport's take on the press and Spider-Man

Give this post a read. I'm continuing to be skeptical of the idea that Spider-Man The Musical - which is an inherently commercial property - has anything, really, to do with artistic pursuits as I understand them. Still, I like what Ken Davenport is saying here from, ahem, a Producer's Perspective.

"Yes, I am getting a bit bored by article after article about the injuries, and who is really in charge, and what the cast had for breakfast the day they found out Julie Taymor was out.

But the real reason I'm over it is that many members of the press (not all, mind you) and the public are constantly calling for Producers to risk more on Broadway . . . to push the boundaries of what Broadway is about . . . to stop thinking about budgets and pursue excellence, instead of just excellent economics.

Has anyone actually realized what just went down on 42nd St?

The Producers of a $70+ million dollar musical that has been plagued with issues since its inception, but has been grossing 1 million plus per week just said, "We're shutting the show down, because we think we can make it better."

From my new play

Working on Traveling to Montpelier, my newest play. Thought it might be fun to share a bit of it with you, as I work on it. A bit of a teaser, maybe. Maybe just to remind you guys and myself that what I'm up to is really just writing, first and foremost.

These are the opening lines of the play, from the current draft.

DANIEL

Even though the world is a great stone that no one can lift, I believe in Jesus Christ. There never was an Atlas. Gravity is not alive. Nothing is alive. Still, there is and always was the Lord. We are far away from everything. We recycle air, we die. Then, we’re born. Nothing is made and nothing disappears. Stasis. Ice. Water freezes solid. The sun expands. Eventually, this will be the end. But still, I know that Jesus is my Savior. This whole world is just a shell, and when it burns away, what’s left, will be the Spirit.

Question: what new plays should be taught in high schools?

I recently received news that Ray Fulmer passed away. He was a tremendously influential teacher at the high school I attended. He was a local poet and actor, a man who had a great passion for writing and drama. He directed me in Spoon River Anthology in high school. We all can probably think of a few teachers that we had growing up that we felt really "got it." That were inspirational and exciting and made us feel like words were beautiful and important.

He'll be missed. I hope he knew that I wandered off to write plays and live out some of the values that I saw him express.

It got me thinking: much of the general public appreciation for theater comes from public school. The high school musical. The production of Our Town or Arsenic and Old Lace. Whatever it is. And of course the high school curriculum includes some drama as well.

So...are there plays written in the last 20 years... meaning from 1990 - 2010 or so, that you feel should be added to the mix for high school students? (Maybe there are some that are already being include of which I am unaware...?) Obviously the challenge is not only what stands the test of time, but what is appropriate for that age group. Should Tracy Letts be taught alongside Arthur Miller and Eugene O'Neil, for example? Should David Lindsay-Abaire? Should Sarah Ruhl?

Proof?
Wit?
Doubt?

Another play that has only one word as it's theme and title?

What do you think?

Rabbi Hersh and the Talking Lobster

What was originally produced as Trayf is now published in Great Short Comedies: Vol. 5 from Playscripts as Rabbi Hersh and the Talking Lobster. It's a play about a giant lobster that wants to convert to Judaism. Originally directed by Kyle Ancowitz and featuring David DelGrosso (the most blonde Rabbi of all time) and Matthew Trumbull as a man in a big lobster suit.

Order it today.

It's really not that complicated

Listen.

Not all things are properly valued by the market, therefore we should not let market principles dictate the behavior of all things. It's not that complicated. Economics is a single lens through which to view the world, and it's a lens based on efficiency and production. It's central principles are not beauty or truthfulness or even, necessarily, usefulness.

Could we please, then, discuss journalism and government and the arts on their own terms - in terms of what they exist for, which is not, at their core, to turn a profit? It should be our goal to try to remove or reduce, as best we can, market influences on those things so that they can more closely align with their central tenets; not to move them as much as possible into the private sector, simply to avoid paying taxes.

Trying to read more blogs

Added some blogs to the blogroll

Leigh Hile

Swollen Foot

2amtheatre

Hey! Wait a minute!

Maybe...it's not Julie Taymor's fault! Maybe it's not Bono's fault. Why is everyone overlooking the culpability of that charlatan...the Edge?

Solo Shows

So, as I'm working with a friend on his upcoming solo show, I'd like to ask...what are some of the things you have seen in solo performances that have worked for you, and some of the pitfalls you'd advise us to avoid? Just curious.

Repost: Rules for the Naming of Plays

Since people seem to like my dating tips, thought I'd repost some of my other pieces of useful advice. That's the nice thing about having had this blog since 2005. I can offer you reruns!

These are Rules for the Naming of Plays from 2007.

King of Limbs

So...what do you all think of Radiohead's new album? To me, it's sort to In Rainbows what Amnesiac was the Kid A. I honestly like the songs, but it's not grabbing me like In Rainbows did.

Buy My Plays!

If you like my blog and want to support my work (or you just want to buy a new play or two!) order these plays of mine today!

The Death of King Arthur

Glee Club

When Is A Clock -(Make sure you read the really funny one-star "I threw this play in the trash" review on Amazon. I love that review!)

and stay tuned for

Rabbi Hersh and the Talking Lobster (formerly known as "Trayf")

Dainty Cadaver published in the Midway Journal

I participated in Piper McKenzie's Dainty Cadaver just a short while ago, and now the three texts that were generated can be found in the February 2011 issue of the Midway Journal. My script, for the record, is a part of Team B: January 29th, 1993. Give it a look. Very cool. Congrats to all involved for getting the texts out there.

Totally great

Posts referenced and discussed here.

How To Be Better At Dating Actors (Because You Are Not Blameless)

On Facebook, a friend of mine recently linked to 9 Reasons Why Dating Actors is a Bad Idea. It reminds us that actors can be insecure, self-centered and financially unstable. Which is, you know unique to them. People who sell real estate are known to be remarkably stable, personally confident, and giving.

To be fair, articles like the aforementioned are really just a part of the perpetual random content generator necessary to run sites that are all about ad sales and traffic. (11 ways to teach a cat to use the toilet. Five ways you'll know if your girlfriend has recently had a third nipple removed. Six uses for the common household house.) Still, though, I am not immune. I know that you want to read these little goddamn lists and chuckle to your impressive self about the foibles of others bipeds.

So, with an eye on content that leads to traffic, and also an eye on your endless need for simple advice, and an eye on the mirror (always) I shall provide you with...

7 Ways To Be Better At Dating Actors (Because You Are Not Blameless)

1. Praise Your Actor.

You know what people like (even people who aren't constantly judged on their looks and way of speaking)? To be told they don't suck. So if Your Actor says "Do I suck at acting?" or "Am I pretty?" very quickly just say "You are a good actor and you are good looking." Did that cause you irreparable harm? Did it take up time that you intended to use watching The Bachelor? Just get over yourself and be decent, you Martyr. Hint: This works for everyone all the time.

2. Stop treating Your Actor as if his or her career is unique and strange.

It is not some unique life goal to be an actor. There are millions of actors. Some of them become really famous and successful. Some of them achieve a moderate but impressive level of success and are extremely happy with that. (Not every financial wizard becomes Warren Buffett, but that doesn't mean they don't make a cent.) Regardless, if you would just stop rolling your eyes every time Your Actor tries to rehearse a monologue from Agnes of God, maybe you'd both get along a bit better. The same thing is happening just two apartments down. Trust me.

3. If Your Actor is in a play, and you don't like the play, it is not Your Actor's fault.

Before you met Your Actor on Match.com, maybe you never trucked your ass out to a black box theater far out on the elevated train to see people in all-white clothes enact Medea with no budget. Okay, fine. Maybe, even, seeing that particular version of Medea gives you a goddamned headache. Fair enough. Your Actor, though, did not write Medea or direct himself or herself to put on the duck mask and would also probably prefer to be in the latest Tony Kushner in Minneapolis. Just buy Your Actor a drink and be nice about it.

4. If Your Actor has a weird schedule, spend time with other people for a change.

So if Your Actor has a few weeks of rehearsal and it's hard to see Your Actor as much as you want. Maybe you should call up your pals and go have a drink and reconnect and stop being so needy all the time. Didn't you have more than one friend in college? Live it up. Your Dad would probably give his little finger if your Mother would just take a sewing class and let him watch TV a couple of nights a week, right? Could we get a little glass half full here?

5. Don't be such a @$$hole about Your Actor not being rich.

Is it possible that just because Your Actor cannot afford to take you to the nicest restaurant in town, that does not mean that Your Actor has made bad chocies? You know who else probably can't afford to take you to Chez Maxout CreditCard? School teachers. Social workers. People that work with the poor. If you want so much to have $18 cocktails on the Upper East Side before you drop a $100 each on a meal that is made up largely of lamb medallions, maybe you can pay for it yourself with your big fat wallet.

6. If Your Actor decries the aging process, remember that life is unfair.

Guess why Your Actor is constantly worried about turning 30? Or why he or she points at each wrinkle and/or gray hair and pouts. Because he or she will, more than likely, be punished for being normal and growing up. They are in a field where being young and pretty helps and being older does not. Maybe at your job, when you hit 35, you just get a raise or some shit. That is unlikely to be true for Your Actor, especially if Your Actor is a woman. Don't like it? Neither does Your Actor. Be sympathetic, for the love of God.

7. Stop judging Your Actor for being an actor.

There are lots of perfectly nice, sane, well-meaning, rational, totally great people who are actors. They are not nuts, they just want to meet a nice person (maybe you) and go out to the movies and have a laugh. Perhaps this is Your Actor. You'll never know if you keep behaving like such a square.

----

You're welcome.

Quick Thought: New plays versus New films

In the world of films, the new film is a commercially viable prospect (See it on opening weekend! The hottest young stars and directors!) and the older films are pretty much immediately viewed as classics, Netflix fodder, stuff for Criterion, or trucked out by film societies. You'll undoubtedly find more non-profit foundations dedicated to the preservation of old French black and white films by obscure directors than non-profits dedicated to new filmmakers. New filmmakers are out there hustling to connect to studios and producers and market their work. They are the lifeblood of an industry that wants to always make new stars, new movies, churns out what's next all the time.

But in theater, old workhorses are largely seen as the only truly commercially viable prospect, and new plays are largely (not entirely, but largely) a non-profit proposition. New Play Development is somehow viewed as a grant-worthy public works project, and a re-imagined Our Town is more likely to be $65 a ticket.

In short:

New Movie = Run Out And See It Before Your Friends Do
New Play = A Solemn Public Good, Please Donate
Old Movie = Something That Needs To Be Preserved And Discussed In Graduate Programs
Old Play = Perhaps A Broadway Revival?

To say nothing of old TV shows, which disappear from the public mind with haste.

Certainly, one can find examples of why this is true. (Bloody Bloody Andrew Jackson was put forth as hot and young and got swallowed, largely, but a commercial run. Chicago will never disappear.) Still, hard not to wonder how theater evolved to embrace the non-profit model so completely, that it's best prospects for exciting young audiences are largely supported by taxes and charitable giving.

Returned!

I have returned from Guatemala, rested! Pam and I went to Antigua, Tikal, Chichicastenengo and Lake Atitlan. Beautiful. Now, ready for more blogging.

Away!

Hey everyone -

I'm away on vacation in Guatemala for the next week. Whatever I hoped to post before then will have to wait until I return. In the meantime, I hope you all will enjoy this.

Electronic Playscripts

I just bought Infectious Opportunity, by James Comtois for my Kindle. Martin Denton has also entered the eBook market, putting one of his many anthologies in the format.

Right now, as far as I know, neither of the publishers that carry my work offer eBooks. Curious what you all think of the prospect. It seems like it would be extremely useful for play publishers, but it's also a very new market, and perhaps there are challenges to the licensing model that works with this format.

Would you buy a play for the Kindle? Are you just basically opposed to the format? Do you see reasons why this isn't going to work for the stage? Or do you think it's just inevitable that digital publishing comes to Drama?

Blog = Empty Hole of Nothingness?

No, no. Not yet. Just doing all sorts of exciting other things that are requiring my attention. Which means you, blog readers, keep getting me posting "Oh SO sorry I'm not blogging so much." Like some jerk.

Example: tomorrow is my wife's birthday and also Valentine's Day. Requires focus! (This is her awesome blog, which is a lot more awesome than mine. Read it, subscribe to it, learn to love it.)

On February 17th, we are honeymooning in Guatemala for 9 days. I will not be blogging from there, but I promise to have a great time.

You are still my favorite blog readers. I find you strangely compelling. I will return a guns a-blazin' soon enough.

Here. A video.

For all of you playing at home

In terms of my own work, I just got the proofs from Playscripts for a new short play for an anthology (fun, fun!) and just finished the first draft of my new play Traveling to Montpelier. Which is, in it's current form, quite the weird little wind-up doll.

Can I also add...

Spider Man in the comics? Endless hours of amazing stories in that boring old paper format. (Now available for the iPad!)

Spider Man in the movies? A blockbuster franchise!

Spider Man on stage? A G(r)eek Chorus, a Spider Goddess, and acrobatics.

*Slaps Forehead*

Broadway, will you please stop embarrassing me in front of my friends?

Ben Brantley vs Spider Man

At last! Ring the Bell!

Landesman on Supply and Demand

I'll be posting some thoughts about this soon, even if I'm a bit late to the dance. As a bit of teaser, I guess I'll say that I'm finding it increasingly worrisome that the language of economics has become the default "language of the reasonable" in our public discourse.

More soon.

A quiet week

Lots going on, and a little under the weather, so am I blogging lots? No, no I'm not. But I still love you, blog people. I still think about you. I still wonder if you're happy in your lives, if you feel fulfilled. I still stare out my Brooklyn window, at the roof of the next door building, and think "How can I make the blog readers more satisfied with me?"

Here's what I thought of.

Daniel Kitson

Not so much blogging this week, folks. Busy bee, I am.

Pam took me to see The Interminable Suicide of Gregory Church at St. Ann's Warehouse. Absolutely terrific piece of work. Loved how it played with the notion of fiction, and how the layers of the play sort of grew on me as I sat with it.

It looks like it closes shortly, but if you can get in, I'd heartily recommend it. Kitson is really someone to keep an eye on.

Mad Libs

Dainty Cadaver Mad Libs...Freeman style.

Miscellaneous

• I am involved in this evening called Dainty Cadaver. It will be popular, as there are lots of folks involved. So tickets in advance? Smart. My evening is Team B: January 29th, 8pm. What I wrote was less weird than what came before me, but not so completely un-weird as most normal things are wont to be.
• Jeff Lewonczyk is interviewed about the Comic Book Theater Festival.
• My next play reading (did you know that people do play readings?) will be on February 7th. It will be the first reading of my newest play (writing it as we speak I tell you) Traveling to Montpelier. For those of you who read or remember When Is A Clock, Traveling to Montpelier is the title of a very important book within that story. This new play's lead character was the person who wrote the fictional book Traveling to Monpelier, fictional author Daniel Wallers. Looking forward to hearing it. More details as they arise.
• Actor Matthew Trumbull, with whom I share a friendship that goes back to freshman year of college, is now working on a solo show. I'm helping him with dramaturgy and things like that. The script, as it stands, is terrific. We'll be doing a public reading of the play in late February, early March. I'll let you know.
• Spider Man: Turn Off The Dark is still open, even though now they have to say they're in previews.
• I'm been offered the gig to host this upcoming podcast series: New Books In Theatre. A part of the newly planned New Books Network. Very exciting. The planning is being done, and soon, you'll all get to hear me ask people about their books and stuff.
• Finally: Liam Neeson on a Cartoon Show that I like. Hooray, says I.
• Have a wonderful weekend!

In case you hadn't heard

Play readings are used to develop new work.

The Brick's Summer Festival Theme for 2011 is...

The Comic Book Theater Festival.

Which joins the auspicious ranks of the $ellout Festival, Film Festival: A Theater Festival, The Hell Festival, The Pretentious Festival, The Antidepressant Festival and The Too Soon Festival.

And so...what do we think?

What to do today

You should buy a copy of Glee Club.

Or a copy of When Is A Clock.

Or a copy of The Death of King Arthur.

Because you like my blog and you like me. Oh, and they're good plays. Good to add to your extensive collection.

Thought of the day

Spider Man: Turn Off The Dark has already opened.

Hmmm

An "unofficial" Turn Off The Dark blog. But who is this anonymous webmaster?

Frankly, this seems like the sort of thing a sophisticated marketing firm would do in order to establish a counter-presence in the blogosphere without going on the record.

I mean, right?

Obama's remarks from Tuscon

Posted here.

I think this is worth reading

TPM's guide to violent rhetoric.

Glee Club is now available for purchase and licensing

My play GLEE CLUB is now available for purchase and licensing on Playscripts.com. Order yourself a steaming hot copy today.

For the sake of argument

A pro Spider-Man: Turn Off The Dark, outside-the-theater-world rave from geek central.

The Completed Vision

Charles Isherwood dives into the "to review or not to review Spider-Man: Turn Off The Dark in previews" discussion with this blog post on the New York Times.

He writes a defense of the practice of withholding reviews of Broadway previews in this way:

"...if a critic’s job is to assess the total merits of a work of art – or at least a gaudy chunk of entertainment – reason also argues that the entertainment should be allowed to achieve the completed form its creators had envisioned before judgment is rendered. Painters do not show their work until they have deemed it finished, although the undiscerning eye (and even discerning ones) might not be able to tell the difference between a finished Jackson Pollock and an unfinished one. Film companies run test screenings of uncompleted films to see how they fare with the public.

Works of theater are, thanks to the preview process, vulnerable to early public assessment. But if anything they are more in need of extended gestation. They don’t properly live until their metabolism has been tested, and almost always tweaked, by interaction with a live audience. Lines of dialogue, bits of business, even whole scenes that seem surefire in rehearsal can fall flat when they meet the objective eye of an impartial audience. For this reason the preview period can be viewed, at least from an aesthetic perspective, as the crucial fine-tuning process that can sometimes make or break a new play or musical. And with the price tag of production a musical on Broadway now in the tens of millions of dollars – “Spider-Man” has set a new record at $65 million – the possibility of employing the once-standard out-of-town tryout to work out the kinks in a show is rarely financially viable."

Isherwood notes that with price tags this high, producers who hope to recoup their investment must get Broadway priced tickets sold as quickly as possible - a dubious defense of charging over $100 a ticket for a show that is (by his own words) unfinished and not open to the press. In short, investors won't spend top dollar on a musical if unwitting or curious consumers can't be charged early and often.

The primary reason that Isherwood cites for not reviewing a production, though, (and I suspect he's ambivalent about it from the tone of the piece) is that theatrical performances need a chance to breathe and grow and find their footing in front of a live audience. "Reason argues" that a play should achieve the "completed form the creators had envisioned" before it is ethical to judge the work. The work, in essence, must be judged on it's best day, all the kinks worked out. A 'painting' should not be shown before the 'painter' deems it worthy.

His arguments are pretty straightforward and sound. All this hoopla about previews shouldn't be that remarkable. It is, after all, about an outlier: Spider-Man's producers are pushing the boundaries of what's acceptable to demand from the press and from audiences.

But, Mr. Isherwood's standard for when a play should be reviewed made my eyebrows go up. For hundreds of plays produced under the guidelines of the Showcase or Seasonal Codes all over New York City...the small, uncommercial works, the weird stuff, the "Indie" theater... that standard does not apply.

Plays with budgets as low as $20,000 can scant afford more than sets and a publicist and stipends for their Equity performers and rental costs. (For example, my production of Brandywine Distillery Fire at Incubator Arts Project cost around $12,000 for a two week run.) With that budget, they might even squeeze out some decent production values. They will receive a run of ... 25 performances? At their longest. If the New York Times or Time Out New York go to see them and review them, it is likely they will come to the very first or second public performance. Whatever benefit that these small productions might receive from months of extra work, whatever "completeness" they have yet to achieve before a reviewer check them out, is not in the budget.

The reason is just as financial for small producers as it is for Broadway producers. Smaller producers raise as much money as they can, use much of their own money as well, and they can't afford even a week of "previews" for a four week run. Instead, they get their plays up as quickly and cheaply as possible, trusting in their luck, in their perseverance and in the talent of those involved. They hope that a few good reviews will garner enough interest and paying customers to either broaden their industry profile or break even, or both.

These practitioners, I think it's safe to say, largely create works that can rival the artistic mert (if not the scale) of superhero musicals or dancing versions of feature films. Still, they are rarely reviewed at all, and when they are, they're given scant time to "achieve the completed form their creators [have] envisioned."

This isn't an argument that the New York Times, or any other major press, shouldn't come down below 34th Street or past 9th Avenue and see what there is to see. I'm glad they do, and I think they have shown they care a great deal for the theater created beyond the limits of Broadway. (I won't, though, go so far as to treat these Off-Off Broadway reviews as community service. A part of covering the arts is covering the arts.)

I'm also not arguing that a reviewers should use kid gloves with a production because it is making due with less. If a production is set before an audience for their time and attention, it should be judged as complete. Caveats in this area help no one, not the artist who is struggling to be heard, nor the critic who is making an assessment.

In short, I'm not decrying the treatment that Off-Off Broadway productions receive. I am highlighting this disparity to challenge the notion that those in previews have an unassailable right to create their "art" unmolested by the judgment of the press In fact, they have purchased that "right."

One could produce more than 3000 showcase code productions with the entire budget of the Turn Off The Dark. That doesn't mean people shouldn't spend money on Broadway- I honestly don't mind if a commercial producer raises funds for a commercial production and then tries to make that production a commercial success. What I object to is treating expensive public rehearsals as untouchable and holy, even as those of us who are making cultural artifacts for breadcrumbs are given far less time and room to breathe. If those of us with light wallets are expected to withstand the creaky process of a single dress rehearsal before a major reviewer stops by; I think a $65 million musical about a Marvel Comic book character directed by Julie Taymor with songs by Bono and the Edge...can withstand a few blog posts after several months of performances.

I think we all realize that these things are not equivalent, and that's the nature of the marketplace. All of us whose budgets consist of next-to-nothing still work overnight to bang sets together and throw our best at the critics, firm in the belief that they will see us on a good night, with generous hearts, and give us the legitimacy that won't come from pay. Heck, even if the New York Times shows up and gives us a swift kick in the ass, small productions know that we will have risen above the noise for a moment, and we're grateful for the amplification. If we fail to live up to our "ideal," sometimes it's a failure of imagination, sometimes of will, sometimes of resources. The preview option, though, is simply not in a tool in our toolbox.

That's why, I guess, I'm skeptical of the argument that defends previews as a way to serve Art with a capital "A." It feels more like an elaborate game of "Mother May I?" The standard mapped out ("never review the play until it's completed to the producer's satisfaction") is neither universally applied, nor could it be feasibly - at least not until the Showcase Code is adequately reformed. In the end, there's a brilliance to the profit model of charging your audience to watch you develop a show and keeping the press at bay as long as possible. Let's just not pretend that, in all cases, it's in service of more than protecting an investment. The rest of us aren't given such generous allowances.

The things you need to write a play

So you want to write a play. You love drama. You've read American Buffalo and Art and Happy Days and The Clean House. You know what a play should look like. You have a great idea for a terrific story with a quirky premise that employs magical realism and gritty real realism. You have a great title. You've even read a book about it. You know your unities.

But...that's all up in your head.

What do you need, what actual stuff, do you need to make this happen? Sure, you think ... a computer with a word processor. But your simple thinking on this subject is what separates you from a professional. Playwriting is an act that takes place in the real world, often over a course of weeks or months. You must be provisioned. You wouldn't play football with a soccer ball would you? Unless you were from Brazil.

So, for your benefit, I offer you the following inventory:

1. A computer with a word processor.

You need to write and store your work and this how to get it done. One might say "pen and paper" but one might also say "gold standard."

Preferably this computer should be a laptop, so you can bring it with you to a local coffee shop and make a show of having something to do with your Saturday afternoons. If this computer is an Apple Computer, that is even better. There is no advantage in word processing power, it's just fashionable and fashion is how we project confidence. I learned that from Project Runway.

Oh and for all you people who were born in the goddamn 90s, please at a bare minimum grant yourself a QWERTY keyboard.

2. A cup.

Do I care what is in the cup? I do not. Many will say "coffee" but ... who gives a shit really? Drinking while writing is a time-honored tradition, and it has largely replaced the pack of cigarettes that once fueled good work. If you want fruit juice, that's really your call, wimp.

Regardless of your choice between tea, water or whiskey, you will be drinking something and so you will need a container for it. To save others the burden of your filth, carry your own cup with you and wash it yourself, like a grown-up. A mug is the best choice, because it will largely cover up whatever you're drinking if you're a lush, or keep things warm if you are not.

The cup should have an Apple logo on it. That's fashionable.

For you people born in the goddamn 90s, there is no App that replaces the cup yet. Get a real cup.

3. Pants.

You cannot write well without pants. Sitting at a computer with only undergarments will inevitably lead to reading through pornographic websites and losing your literary mojo. Wearing a skirt to write is not restrictive enough. Restriction breeds creativity. Even the most comfortable pants will breed more creativity than a flowing skirt.

Sexist, you say? No one forced you to read this, so stuff it.

4. A rock.

Get a small, smooth stone and place it on the left side of your computer. Name the rock. Try putting the rock in your pocket. Take it out of your pocket. Put it on the right side of your computer. How does it compare to the left side? Do you feel less or more balanced when the small, smooth rock is on the right or left side? Hard to say? Repeat the process. Once this is determined, say the name of your rock aloud (example: "Rock.") The rock will not respond.

The play will finish itself.

5. A photograph of your Dad.

This is universal inspiration.

Your Dad isn't so sure that you've made good choices, even though he's always been there for you, supporting you financially and emotionally. Even if he's passed away, you can still tell that he's watching you and occasionally getting disappointed by you. Let that disappointment wash over you. Then, write dialogue that is, really, to him.

If your Dad was never overtly supportive, try imagining that deep down, it was because he was never able to achieve his own goals and sacrificed everything for his ungrateful, indulgent children. A sense that your parents blame you for their own unhappiness is like a video game power up for drama.

For advanced writers: If the picture begins to fail to inspire you, write the word "Future" on the photo in lipstick. Problem solved.

6. An empty manila folder.

Oh what will soon fill this folder?

Mystery!

7. Red Yeast Rice

A natural supplement that can help reduce cholesterol. People like you, people who want to write plays, have high cholesterol. Take it twice a day with meals. Make oatmeal a part of your breakfast too. This way, as you sit there writing, shiftless and pudgy, you can defend against heart disease and gall stones.

8. A totem

How else will you be able to tell the difference between The Dream and Reality? Don't let anyone else touch your totem. Also, don't make your totem something you can eat, like a sandwich, because you can really only use that once.

9. Balloons.

Always remember that writing a play is fun. Nothing tells us we're having fun like a mess o' colorful balloons. Before writing, make sure you have some helium filled balloons that will float gently and kindly above your screen at all times. You'll feel content, you'll smile, and you'll know that no matter the subject of your play ("the tyranny of the ignorant majority") or the state of your characters ("abject misery"), you're throwing a birthday party for your new Art.

10. A mirror

Listen, writing can be lonely. Especially writing plays, because when you're done, you still have to shop around what is essentially a blueprint for a live production to a bunch of people who, while ostensibly looking for new work, will look at your masterpiece as one more thing to add to their list of obligations. So... writing a play requires a boost. Look at yourself while you write. I know we're told to look inside ourselves, but instead, look at yourself in the gray light of your apartment, nakedly starring at the pimples and weird teeth and crooked nose that you inflict on everyone all the time. Smile at that thing you see. That's you, a playwright.

Despite your instinct towards revulsion, love that playwright. That playwright needs all the love you can spare.

-----


You're welcome!

Isaac Butler vs Spider Man: The Musical

Yeowch, says I. Quite a review. Oh and so unethical, because the production is still in previews.

If you would like to purchase two orchestra seats for this show at nearly $180 dollars a piece (if tickets are available!) try Broadway.com.

Looking back on 2010

So it goes. Another year ends. I've read other places that 2010 was a tough year for lots of people. I have to say, though, that this was one hell of a busy and exciting year for me.

First of all, personally... I got married to this lovely lady, and I couldn't be happier. We were engaged in Burlington, Vermont in May and married only months later, October 16th, in New Hope, Pennsylvania. October 16th just happens to be our six year anniversary of being a couple, so the stars were aligned. I can't say enough about the wedding...it was the best day of my life. So many friends and family there, too many to try to remember in this post. But the ceremony, the reception, all of it, were absolutely magical.

Also, several of my closest friends had children this year. Dave and Erica welcomed the beautiful Emma Marie DelGrosso into our big New York family. Also, my friends Michael Colby Jones and Stephanie Fagin-Jones now have twin boys, Alex and Zachary. Future Yankees fans, to be sure.

Professionally, I had a solid year.

Glee Club was produced at the Access Theater early in the year, and it will soon by available from Playscripts, Inc.

Trayf (under the title Rabbi Hersh and the Talking Lobster) was also picked up by Playscripts.

That Old Soft Shoe was performed as a part of the Too Soon Festival at the beginning of the summer, and it's a production I was extremely proud of and felt was a bit overlooked frankly.

Almost concurrently with that production was the production of Denouement, and then in September, Michael Gardner and I co-produced Brandywine Distillery Fire (which grew from the work done on Denouement and the prior year's Exposition) at St. Mark's Church as a part of the Incubator Arts Project. It was a real honor for me to work in that space for the first time. It was a fruitful collaboration with Michael and the entire cast. It was good stretch stylistically, and we had some thoughtful press.

Finally, a worked for the second year on the Worldwide Webcast from Times Square on New Year's Eve (which was fun, yet again) and have begun working on new projects for 2011 already.

New friends, new opportunities, new works, new members of the family, and getting married. I challenge 2011 to be just as good at 2010. We'll see!

What happens as you get older

I'm 35, so I'm hardly dying of old age, but I have noticed that I am increasingly prone to feeling like crying. Watching True Grit (even better the second time), or listening to When The Ship Comes In by Bob Dylan (for example[s]), I have to keep myself from tearing up.

I was not always like this. This happened to my Dad around 50. Now, if one of us sends him a card, he goes "You guys...are all...grown up..." and holds the phone away from his face.

This will be my fate.

And so it is a new year

And we continue onwards. Ever onwards. To glory. New Year's Resolutions? Get more sleep. Eat carefully. Things like that.

Glee Club will soon be available for purchase from Playscripts. You can, though, already license performance rights.

What's up with me in the world of theater?

Well, I'm working with a good friend on a solo piece that I think is going to be tremendous. This time, I'm more of a director/advisor, which is a lot of fun.

I'm also on the prowl to bring back The Great Escape, a play of mine first produced in 2004. I've always loved the play, it's a deeply personal one, and it's my hope that it'll see new stages and audiences this year.

I'm currently writing Traveling to Montpelier which is a companion play to When Is A Clock. I'm feeling good about how it's going, and I'll keep you up to date as I work my way through it.

For those of you unfamiliar with When Is A Clock, "Traveling to Montpelier" is the name of a book that incites the action in that story. The new play is the story of the book's author, Daniel Wallers. It's my The Magician's Nephew, or something along those lines. I like the idea of a fictional world that can support the weight of several narratives and characters. Can you think of some examples of this type of storytelling you'd recommend to me, as reference? Or some cautionary tales?

Either way, I hope you're starting your year off right. More to come, as always.

John Simon

Continues to write here.